Creative COW SIGN IN :: SPONSORS :: ADVERTISING :: ABOUT US :: CONTACT US :: FAQ
Creative COW's LinkedIn GroupCreative COW's Facebook PageCreative COW on TwitterCreative COW's Google+ PageCreative COW on YouTube
APPLE FINAL CUT PRO:HomeFCP ForumFCP XFCPX TechniquesFCP TutorialsFC ServerBasics ForumPodcastFAQ

Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast

COW Forums : Apple FCPX or Not: The Debate

VIEW ALL   •   PRINT
Share on Facebook
Steve ConnorInteresting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 12:28:00 pm

http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/articles/691-using-fcpx-on-long-format-broa...

May be some points to discuss in here?

"FCPX Agitator"


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Daniel FromeRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 12:46:14 pm

I think it proves the point that FCPX is still worth learning, even if just for the novelty sake. Personally I find their post model more evolutionary than the software component of the article: almost everything is done "in house" - and that's where the future is headed. It's a small show and I think that is what's making this show possible to do in FCPX in the first place.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

James MortnerRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 1:56:12 pm

I dont understand the little rant he has about HDV and HDCAM. We use HDCAM here all the time, its still rather important to us !

Haters gonna hate i guess


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Craig SeemanRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 3:05:26 pm

[James Mortner] "I dont understand the little rant he has about HDV and HDCAM. We use HDCAM here all the time, its still rather important to us !"

It seems the article was overly shortened. You almost have to infer some things. HDV as source (who would ever use if for delivery for any kind of work including on broadcast) is heavily compressed.

I think his point about HDCAM is that it's only for final delivery these days and that can come from ProRes 422 HQ file playout, possibly offset dub house rather than purchasing a deck. Basically I think his point is they have no business reason as a post house to purchase and hook up an HDCAM deck to FCPX for output.

I can't speak to current post facilities for broadcast as the last time I was doing that full time I was using DigiBeta (pre HD days) but just as ingest may be centralized away from the NLE, export for broadcast may also be centralized away from the NLE.

BTW this is one reason why I think FCPX is headed towards a media managed server control based system. To me, the metadata potential screams for it. The Event/Project management is fairly primitive because I think it may be handled elsewhere (although it badly needs to be improved in FCPX itself).



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Marvin HoldmanRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 3:21:53 pm

Craig Seeman - "BTW this is one reason why I think FCPX is headed towards a media managed server control based system. To me, the metadata potential screams for it. The Event/Project management is fairly primitive because I think it may be handled elsewhere (although it badly needs to be improved in FCPX itself)."

Just curious...

Do you think they might have some form of "open" media management? As in, the ability to export the metadata to other data management systems? Or import said data from other management systems? I've been very curious about what might become of their stated alliance with the Square Box folks. It would seem that that particular cohesion might be very promising. Perhaps this might fill the void that you are describing.

Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username - vidmarv


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Craig SeemanRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 3:52:32 pm

[Marvin Holdman] "Do you think they might have some form of "open" media management? As in, the ability to export the metadata to other data management systems? Or import said data from other management systems?"

CatDV is already FCXP XML compatible.
http://www.squarebox.co.uk/index.html

BTW with CatDV Pro you supposedly move FCP7 Sequences (not projects) into FCPX as well. There are limits as to what info can be imported. I haven't done this personally but CatDV overall does seem like a good complimentary product for FCPX.
http://www.squarebox.co.uk/fcpxml.html

My hunch is that Apple is going to be developing in this direction (file/metadata management), but it's only a hunch.



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Marvin HoldmanRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 9:50:47 pm

Yeah, we've been on a CatDV Enterprise Server for the last year and a half. Brilliant product, can't say enough good things about it. Just wondered if you might have heard any recent scuttlebutt about it's direction as it relates to FCPX?

Frankly, this association is one of the bigger reason's I still monitor this forum. It has the biggest potential to bring FCPX from it's current state of inadequacy to something that might possibly be a practical collaborative tool.

Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username - vidmarv


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Thomas FrankRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 8, 2012 at 12:56:47 am

[Craig Seeman] ". HDV as source (who would ever use if for delivery for any kind of work including on broadcast) is heavily compressed."
BBC has.



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Walter SoykaRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 2:13:28 pm

I liked this line:
I understand exactly what is needed from potential software and am fully capable of deciding for our company and clients if something will work for our/their needs or not.
Of course I have my own opinions, but just because I don't think something would work for me doesn't mean I think it wouldn't work for others with different needs. Good for Dustin Hoye for finding something that works well for him.


I struggled a bit with the this line:
From our network, viewers, executive producers and clients- our shows continue to get better each season. We are currently editing this season, season 8, in FCPX and so far, everyone believes that the shows have never looked or sounded better. This doesn't mean you can't achieve the same level of quality with FCP 7, but it does mean you can achieve the same or better quality of project with FCP X.
I can't tell if he's crediting the software for the improvement or not, and I can't figure out whether he believes FCPX enables "better quality" work than FCP7 or not.


There's a lot of misinformation about color in that article. Simply selecting a Rec. 709 profile for your monitor will not make it accurate. Accurate color via ColorSync absolutely requires an accurately profiled monitor. It is not optional. Anything else may be a close approximation at best or a haphazard guess at worst -- and without measurement tools, you'd have no way of knowing which one you're getting.

Also, feeding "blue-only" monochrome color bars via RGB to a monitor that has no proper controls anyway will neither help you guarantee accurate color nor even roughly line the monitor up. See J.P. Owen's outstanding post on blue-only as a monitor function for use with encoded color bars [link] for more.

There is simply no substitute for profiling a monitor when working in a color-managed system.

I'm curious about the 1080i output the author mentions -- does it actually work? Can you use this to evaluate footage for field reversal?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Craig SeemanRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 3:17:37 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I can't tell if he's crediting the software for the improvement or not, and I can't figure out whether he believes FCPX enables "better quality" work than FCP7 or not."

I can't help but think the article was overly edited so we have to infer things. I think the gist is that FCPX hasn't had a negative impact on quality. There's no qualitative downside to FCPX. That's probably why he goes into Rec709 and color calibration as well as color grading because that would certainly be a quality issue.

[Walter Soyka] "There's a lot of misinformation about color in that article. Simply selecting a Rec. 709 profile for your monitor will not make it accurate. Accurate color via ColorSync absolutely requires an accurately profiled monitor. It is not optional."

I was under the impression he was talking about profiling but, yes, I can see where he might be saying either/or. Again it seems the article is overly edited and I think the interviewer/writer should have clarified this point. I thought the "wrong/correct" example might have been related to the difference between using a Rec 709 profile vs actual profiling.

[Walter Soyka] "Also, feeding "blue-only" monochrome color bars via RGB to a monitor that has no proper controls anyway will neither help you guarantee accurate color nor even roughly line the monitor up."

Another fuzzy part of the article. I don't see a blue only feature in FCPX (can I really not find it?). Since he makes mention of both Lion and FCPX perhaps he's beta testing the next FCPX release and slipped something out.



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Oliver PetersRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 4:10:46 pm

The whole discussion of color space and video levels was either truncated or he was very confused. I had a hard time following it. There is no "blue gun" feature. You can turn off channels in the viewer, leaving only blue on, which probably achieves the same result, but still....

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Craig SeemanRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 4:35:40 pm

[Oliver Peters] "There is no "blue gun" feature."

That's why I'm guessing he might be beta testing FCPX. It's the only explanation I can think of regarding that comment in the article.

[Oliver Peters] " either truncated or he was very confused."

Just some wild speculation but he may well have been discussing beta features that had to be hastily edited. The article just seems like there was lots of hatchet editing done to it.

Stuff like this.
I am very impressed with the 1.2 update- proves to be very stable for a version 1.0 piece of software.

Either it's 10.0.2 or maybe he's using 10.1 beta. How does something like this get missed in proofing and editing the article? Something's up here. Somehow I think 10.1 meant to be changed to 10.0.2 and became 1.2. There's just too many odd things about the article, especially with so much on broadcast monitoring, lead me to suspect he was using the beta.

Given the comments that Evan Shechtman was making in November (he's a beta tester) it's likely in RC state now and getting some real world use. Apple would want the blessing of facility based users if they want FCPX to fly with some credibility as soon as it's released.

Of course maybe the article was just not well edited.



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Franz BieberkopfRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 4:40:09 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Apple would want the blessing of facility based users if they want FCPX to fly with some credibility as soon as it's released."

Oh Craig ... I can't help but think you miss Aindreas when you say things like that.

Franz.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Oliver PetersRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 4:41:07 pm

[Craig Seeman] "That's why I'm guessing he might be beta testing FCPX."

I really doubt that. If so, he's in shackles in the bowls of the Cupertino mothership by now. ;-)

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Craig SeemanRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 5:06:35 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I really doubt that. If so, he's in shackles in the bowls of the Cupertino mothership by now. ;-)"

Which is why the article looks hatcheted . . . maybe. Of course if Cupertino had a hand in it some things in their like version numbering slip ups and blue out support wouldn't have been in there. Keep in mind Evan is a beta testers and is speaking about FCPX (but not in detail about beta features).



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Chris HarlanRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 5:46:48 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Either it's 10.0.2 or maybe he's using 10.1 beta. How does something like this get missed in proofing and editing the article? "

Because it is an online article, and standards everywhere seem to be dropping by the hour?


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Walter SoykaRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 5:01:55 pm

[Craig Seeman] "I can't help but think the article was overly edited"

Could be.

I'm just pointing out that as it stands, the color portion of the interview is confusing or even misleading -- and color is important to get right for broadcast finishing.


[Craig Seeman] "I thought the "wrong/correct" example might have been related to the difference between using a Rec 709 profile vs actual profiling."

As presented, I thought it was part of the "blue-only" discussion about lining up HDTVs attached as second monitors to the Mac.


[Craig Seeman] "I don't see a blue only feature in FCPX (can I really not find it?). Since he makes mention of both Lion and FCPX perhaps he's beta testing the next FCPX release and slipped something out."

It doesn't matter -- pre-display blue-only is voodoo color. Read jPo's post that I linked to above. Blue-only has to be a display feature, not a test signal in and of itself. It's meant to allow the user to adjust for saturation or phase errors within the monitor. It's only relevant on a monitor with the proper controls, and with the proper test signal -- encoded color bars.

Creating a profile for the monitor and allowing ColorSync to manage color with it makes this unnecessary. Until FCPX offers traditional video I/O, profiling is the one and only way to get accurate color.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Franz BieberkopfRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 5:21:33 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Simply selecting a Rec. 709 profile for your monitor will not make it accurate."

Walter,

I hope you'll consider doing a real (article level?) critical analysis of the FCPX monitoring solution when it is finally announced / included. I, for one, would love to hear what you have to say about it.

Franz.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+1


Walter SoykaRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 9:52:18 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "Walter, I hope you'll consider doing a real (article level?) critical analysis of the FCPX monitoring solution when it is finally announced / included. I, for one, would love to hear what you have to say about it."

Franz, that sounds like it could be interesting to really dig into. Thanks for the suggestion, and thanks for your kind words.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

tony westRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 4:26:47 pm

I do NHL for this network but they used to be the Outdoor Life Network so they have hunting and fishing shows.

I talked to some folks that work on those hunting shows and they use a lot of Gopro cams in treestands and on boats and stuff.

Just last night one of our producer for FOXSPORTS brought in a Gopro and wanted it in the Hockey broadcast for bumps or whatever.

I hadn't worked with that camera before.

I like how you can drag the raw camera files straight from the camera right into the timeline of fcp x

You needed a few more hoops to get it into 7

It couldn't have been easier or faster.

The Gopro is moving more and more into major league sports so I'm glad X handles it with such ease.

This is the line that jumped out to me "it makes story telling fun"


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Mitch IvesRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 5:57:14 pm

Interesting article.

I also found this one interesting. I figured it would be up here already and being debated:

http://www.artguglielmo.com/blog/2011/12/24/think-for-yourself.html

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.
mitch@insightproductions.com
http://www.insightproductions.com

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." - Winston Churchill


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Steve ConnorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 6:08:51 pm

[Mitch Ives] "I also found this one interesting. I figured it would be up here already and being debated:

http://www.artguglielmo.com/blog/2011/12/24/think-for-yourself.html
"


Has already been discussed, many of his observations are incorrect and obviously based on not actually knowing how FCPX works. One in a line of people who don't bother to learn a piece of software and then making comments about it.


"FCPX Agitator"


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Mitch IvesRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 6:32:13 pm

Care to point me to that thread?

BTW, I continue to impressed with the awesome efficiency with which you can dispatch any opinion that doesn't align with your own...

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.
mitch@insightproductions.com
http://www.insightproductions.com

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." - Winston Churchill


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Steve ConnorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 6:47:47 pm

[Mitch Ives] "BTW, I continue to impressed with the awesome efficiency with which you can dispatch any opinion that doesn't align with your own..."

I certainly can when someone spouts BS like that, see I have actually learned the software and I use it almost every day, I'm pretty sure that gives me a better "Insight" into FCPX.

Thread is here http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/335/23254#23254

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+1


Mitch IvesRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 7:58:03 pm

Thanks for the link. The rest of your post is completely subjective and therefore doesn't require any comment...

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.
mitch@insightproductions.com
http://www.insightproductions.com

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." - Winston Churchill


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Steve ConnorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 8:09:33 pm

[Mitch Ives] "The rest of your post is completely subjective and therefore doesn't require any comment..."

As are most posts on any forum anywhere. If we all thought like that the internet would have a lot less traffic.

But as I'm on a break from cutting a feature on FCPX at the moment I'll be a bit more subjective.

I quote...

"Because of the way that the program works, you are now limited to editing decisions that are based on a relationship to the first frame of your project. The whole idea of being non linear is things can go where you want them go, and stay there. I can easily work on the end, go back to the beginning, then the middle, etc. That is virtually impossible with FCPX. "

Not true.

"Easy example……lets say you are working on a music video, and the footage has been shot for the "Chorus" parts of the song. There is no way to edit those sections efficiently, leaving black holes for the verses, and going back later. Due to the magnetic timeline, everything wants to insert and ripple."

Not True

"Something as simple as removing a couple minutes from the middle of an edit can't even be done neatly. If you want to remove minutes 4-5, you need to do the compound clip rain dance, make an edit, and prey to the Gods you can get your stuff to un-compound back into some sort of sanity"

Not True

Anything to comment on there?

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Mitch IvesRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 8:27:39 pm

Steve, as usual you've missed the point of my original post. I find all viewpoints interesting. I have yet to read one that rings completely true... nor completely false. Nothing in the known solar system is that black and white.

Just like seat time doesn't make you always right. Do you use the program more than the author of the post you despise? You have no way of knowing... just like you have no way of knowing whether you use it more than anyone else that posts on the forum. But what difference would it make anyway? This forum is full of people that use things a lot and are still wrong in what they post. The connection between those two things is not an absolute.

As I said I find all viewpoints worth considering... even yours. Though I will say that I find some of your more objective posts like the one in this thread a bit more helpful:

http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/344/6636#6636

In the end it isn't about you... it isn't about me... it's not about good or bad, it's about the pursuit of what it actually is...

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.
mitch@insightproductions.com
http://www.insightproductions.com

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." - Winston Churchill


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Steve ConnorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 8:37:24 pm

[Mitch Ives] "Do you use the program more than the author of the post you despise? You have no way of knowing"

Yes I do, and I know this because, as I stated before, and also referred to in my last post, the points he made about editing in FCPX were actually incorrect, not subjectively incorrect but ACTUALLY incorrect

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Lance BachelderRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 9:28:13 pm

Concur - that blog was so blatantly false I didn't even know where to begin my response so just didn't bother - but really really sad.

Glad to see the article this thread is about though - It's funny how all the usual suspects instantly chime in with their negativity etc.

I have to agree that results can be much better with X than 7 - color timing just seems so much cleaner and more subtle, especially on DSLR footage. I'm using a Dreamcolor via Display Port with calibrated profile but looking forward to firing up Kona 3 in future rev.

Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Irvine, California



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Aindreas GallagherRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 9:49:44 pm

[Steve Connor] "
"Easy example……lets say you are working on a music video, and the footage has been shot for the "Chorus" parts of the song. There is no way to edit those sections efficiently, leaving black holes for the verses, and going back later. Due to the magnetic timeline, everything wants to insert and ripple."

Not True
"


quick question steve - do you work it with the primary holding the music track?


http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Steve ConnorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 12:04:25 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "quick question steve - do you work it with the primary holding the music track?"

If it's a performance video then I'll take a master shot, sync the track to it and then use the secondary storylines to layer up other shots above, pretty much exactly as I did in FCP 7, as there is no default ripple.

If it's a non-sync video then I put the music track in the primary and do the same, despite the rumours, it's as easy to cut music pieces in X as in 7, when you know the software



Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Aindreas GallagherRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 12:30:18 am

how do you deal with the fact that the in out points, shortcuts etc default exclusively to the primary? how does that work with your workflow as you attempt to work with footage sitting off the primary in your music edit?

its an intentionally reductive single track imovie style operation editor steve - do you think locking in and out marks to one single track is an advancement to the art?

I'll stick around wailing at apple until they call realistic lights out on FCPX in general... in about two years..? but this is magnificently stupid software.

It is the grand gold - coded by five itunes apple guys on a lunch break - editing software.

Its going to stay stupid steve. Its intellectually stupid software - all my bile aside - this I truly feel is genuinely stupid, ill-informed software.

Like the moron locked in out target, there is just. too. much. stupid to bear steve. far too stupid..


http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+1

Steve ConnorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 12:43:29 am

Sorry Aindreas, I thought it was a genuine question, not just an excuse for one your increasingly psychotic rants.

It used to be funny but it's just starting to get old now. Avid's waiting, hurry along.

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Aindreas GallagherRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 12:56:07 am

easy crack steve, surprisingly savage on your part, and more than a tad ad hominem.

still. answer the question please: how do you deal with this music video scenario, as an editor, where your set in and out targets are constantly locked to one single track? do you find the fact that in and out points are exclusively bound to the primary storyline limiting?

clear your head please, and try, if you can, not to go completely native??


http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Steve ConnorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 1:00:19 am

Pot calling kettle black methinks Aindreas, I've learned my lesson thank you, no more answers for you.



Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Aindreas GallagherRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 1:06:28 am

hang on - isn't this a valid question? I'm not actually ranting here. sort of. isn't the in out target keyboard shortcut limitation a genuine issue?


http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Steve ConnorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 1:18:06 am

I don't get what you mean, what limitation?

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Aindreas GallagherRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 1:21:08 am

oh steve.


http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Steve ConnorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 1:37:51 am

OK one last hurrah before I need to sleep.

Press i to mark an in point in the project, press o to mark an out point.

Press I to mark an in point in the clip

Press q to place the clip ABOVE the primary or any connected clips or secondary storylines.

Am I barking up the wrong tree?

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Lance BachelderRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 1:43:09 am

You're a nice guy Steve. Some of the folks here including some of the "leaders" clearly have no intention of ever giving the software a try. I'd respect that if they were top "pro's" but looking at some of their demo reels I see most are pitifully mediocre and their work needs nothing more than the actual iMovie to accomplish.

There I said it...

Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Irvine, California



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
-3

Aindreas GallagherRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 3:02:04 am

that was really classy, some grinning guy in a baseball cap.


http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Chris HarlanRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 5:42:05 pm

[Lance Bachelder] "I'd respect that if they were top "pro's" but looking at some of their demo reels I see most are pitifully mediocre and their work needs nothing more than the actual iMovie to accomplish.

There I said it...
"


Wow. Lance, I haven't looked at your reel, but that kind of comment is particularly amateurish.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Post removed.

Aindreas GallagherRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 4:38:14 pm

maybe a little bit - all you're really saying there is that you can make an attached clip, I'm talking about editing into something other than the primary.

mark morache says this better than I can - and I reckon he's putting in at least as much effort into this as you are:

I've tried putting audio as the primary storyline, then adding b-roll as a secondary storyline. It feels awkward to me. I really like using I and O on the timeline, and even if I have the secondary storyline selected, it still sets the region on the primary storyline.

After I set my points, I can hit the Q key to make a new connected clip, the hit P and drag the connected clip into the secondary storyline. #awkward

If I set my points THEN select the secondary storyline, my range disappears. The only way I can select a range in the secondary storyline is with the range tool and the mouse. #awkward


the point I'm trying to make here is that it really is in a sense a single track editor. everything after that is a mess of poor metaphors and stupid workflow. I find it ludicrous. It feels cumbersome and stupid.


http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Steve ConnorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 4:44:08 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "I find it ludicrous. It feels cumbersome and stupid."

I've always found Avid to be cumbersome in it's timeline operations as well. I guess if I used it more and learned how it works I might not.

Perhaps I should start posting rants about it on the Avid Forum

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+1


Aindreas GallagherRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 4:46:33 pm

I'd say that last post wasn't a rant really - and if it was, it was largely marks. I'm curious - what do you say to his observations though?


http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

tony westRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 6:13:48 pm

I hear what you are saying Aindreas, that felt strange to me to at first also.

I keep the snapping on when I cut, then I put the playhead where I want to trim the out or in and I just drag the the end of start of the clip to the play head. It snaps right to it with the snapping on.

I don't have the i and o outside the main track but I don't have to unlock or lock tracks either.
That might be the trade off. The time it takes you to lock and unlock vs that drag move.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Steve ConnorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 6:34:03 pm







Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


tony westRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 8, 2012 at 2:54:08 pm

That's a good clip Steve, but I thought he was asking about cutting or trimming a clip in the secondary after it's place above the storyline.

Like, you change your mind and want to make the clip longer or shorter or even cut something out of the middle of the secondary clip.

My bad if that's not what he was asking.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 1:48:06 am

Its true that you can only mark in and out on primary with i and o, but what exactly do you want to do Aindreas?

It doesnt work like 7, but it does work.

An example of what you're trying to do would help.

Just because the i and o is visually marked on the primary doesn't mean the incoming media has to go on to the primary.

It can go above/below as connected clips using the range you marked.

You can also select a connected clip above the primary and edit with a browser based clip as well.

So yeah, it doesnt work like an fcp7 timeline becuase it's not.

Have you tried any of this?

Jeremy


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Aindreas GallagherRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 2:37:44 am

honestly jeremy? that is just a mess of stupid weirdness that nobody will remember in three years. I cant operate consistently outside of the primary, I cant edit consistently outside of the primary, I can't .. ara god, look it doesn't matter.


Just because the i and o is visually marked on the primary doesn't mean the incoming media has to go on to the primary.

It can go above/below as connected clips using the range you marked.

You can also select a connected clip above the primary and edit with a browser based clip as well.


nobody cares about all the weird stupid conventions jeremy - no wait, we do - it actually is fully stupid forgettable software.

ech.


http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Jeremy GarchowRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 8:31:56 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "nobody cares about all the weird stupid conventions jeremy - no wait, we do - it actually is fully stupid forgettable software."

I call bullshit.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Steve ConnorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 10:57:56 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "nobody cares about all the weird stupid conventions jeremy - no wait, we do - it actually is fully stupid forgettable software.
"


You asked a question, it was answered and now you're just trolling

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Aindreas GallagherRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 2:15:21 pm

you're right - that is trolling, but sometimes when one says FCPX conventions out loud they really do sound tortured and ludicrous.


http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Jeremy GarchowRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 6:34:48 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "you're right - that is trolling, but sometimes when one says FCPX conventions out loud they really do sound tortured and ludicrous."

You are just unfamiliar with the language. Big deal.

I don't see whats so hard about I, o, and q.

If you need to replace a shot you select it and replace it. How about that language? Ludicrous? Tortured?

I would love to see playhead replace return. I miss it dearly.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Christian SchumacherRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 3:08:13 pm

There's some interesting insights here, regarding Primary/Secondaries

http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/344/3871#3942


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 6:32:00 pm

[Christian Schumacher] "There's some interesting insights here, regarding Primary/Secondaries

http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/344/3871#3942
"


That was before the .1 update even with one click secondary when adding a transition.

A lot of that thread seems to be inexperience and process learning as we all are.

Here's a more recent thread from Mark: http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/20854


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Franz BieberkopfRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 6:35:09 pm

Christian,


Thanks for the link - I don't really monitor the techniques forum and I had missed this.

David Lawrence's suggestion here is genius - I can imagine any given "storyline" as having multiple tracks.

http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/344/3871#3930

... utterly off-topic but interesting.


Franz.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Steve ConnorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 6:38:00 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "Thanks for the link - I don't really monitor the techniques forum and I had missed this.

David Lawrence's suggestion here is genius - I can imagine any given "storyline" as having multiple tracks.

http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/344/3871#3930

... utterly off-topic but interesting."


I think if Apple do relent and give back some fixed "track" elements then it would be good solution

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Joseph OwensRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 6, 2012 at 6:33:43 pm

One in a line of people who don't bother to learn a piece of software and then making comments about it.

Careful.

Read the rest of the "comments" exchange that follows the article.

What is truly sad are the number of posts on this partition that are dated Dec 24, and Dec 25. Wow, those are some priorities.

jPo

You mean "Old Ben"? Ben Kenobi?


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Matthew CeliaRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 12:44:09 am

I think many people talking about "accurate color" and this guys workflow have missed an important point worth repeating: his shows are airing on broadcast and the consensus is that the shows look JUST as good, if not better (probably more the camera work than the NLE). I think THAT is what is great about this article. He's clearly detailed his workflow for monitoring what he cuts and using FCPX he is able to deliver a show that meets broadcast standards. He also does all his color in FCPX.

I find his workflow and his drive in the spirit of moving forward, rather than clinging to "the way things are done simply because that's the way we've always done them".

And to clear up confusion and misinformation, he is using 10.0.2 and there is the Blue only feature by changing the viewer mode to "blue channel only" while displaying bars. On a TV, you can select 1080i as the display mode (in Lion) and provided the monitor has basic calibration, you can apparently achieve quality that's good to monitor for broadcast.

I found the article pretty exciting. Naysayers be damned.

----------------
FCP Guru
http://www.fcpguru.com


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Walter SoykaRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 5:28:06 am

[Matthew Celia] "I think many people talking about "accurate color" and this guys workflow have missed an important point worth repeating: his shows are airing on broadcast and the consensus is that the shows look JUST as good, if not better... He also does all his color in FCPX... I find his workflow and his drive in the spirit of moving forward, rather than clinging to "the way things are done simply because that's the way we've always done them". "... I found the article pretty exciting. Naysayers be damned.

I started the conversation about color here, so I assume you're talking to me.

Why put the quotes around accurate color? Color matters, and accuracy is important.

Color management in FCPX is an exciting feature, and I've defended FCPX's color and rendering system before [link].

I'm not trying to nay-say FCPX at all here, and I didn't miss the part about broadcast work being cut and colored with it. I think that Mr. Hoye is using a profiled monitor, as he mentions using an "external profiling device," so his workflow looks pretty sound.

If the article is supposed to be about using FCPX to deliver for broadcast, though, it should get color right. Instead, either through poor editing or a technical misunderstanding, the article contains some bad advice.

It also ends before the final deliverable. For the sake of completeness, I'd be curious to hear about the workflow from his file masters to HDCAM tape at the external post facility -- especially if a legalizer is used.

I'm not saying that FCPX is incapable of quality output -- just the opposite! I'm trying to clarify what's necessary to do with FCPX to get quality output.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Herb SevushRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 3:55:17 pm

[Walter Soyka] "For the sake of completeness, I'd be curious to hear about the workflow from his file masters to HDCAM tape at the external post facility -- especially if a legalizer is used."

Should I infer that you are not all that fond of legalizers?

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Matthew CeliaRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 8, 2012 at 12:38:52 am

Walter, my comments weren't directed at you, but were at the several posts after yours that seemed to miss the point about his workflow being good for broadcast work. I know your posts about color, but some people seem to think that without this gear or that feature they can't deliver broadcast output no matter what and the exciting thing about this article to me was proof that you indeed can.

Agree that accurate color is incredibly important. But also have gotten into a fair number of discussions where I feel people pixel push a little too much and spend so much time and money trying to eek out the most accurate system ever. Well, IMO it's never worth it. Look at the audio industry. Everyone there was pimping out their systems with 24bit/96k systems when the 99% of people were listening to heavily compressed MP3 files traded on Napster. We all know where that went. Now people are recording amazing sounding albums in their living room off a Macbook Pro and Protools M-Box. This gets philosophical, but I don't think the video industry is that far behind... I mean look at what's being produced and sold to studios.

But back to the point, agree that clarifying his process would be a benefit to us all. Small houses like mine send out for all tape stuff and while I always feel like we pay up the nose for it, it's still cheaper than the investment in the gear itself (which I feel like is on its way out any way).

----------------
FCP Guru
http://www.fcpguru.com


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Chris HarlanRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 1:39:20 am

Good article. Thanks for posting. I found it very interesting. I hope to see more stuff like this.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Rafael AmadorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 4:00:35 pm

[Walter Soyka] "There's a lot of misinformation about color in that article."
A lot of miss information Walter?
You are too kind.
This guy doesn't know what is he talking about.

One question (I'm a PAL-lander):
Does this statement makes sense in an all digital tapeless postproduction workflow (digital camera-HD-NLE)?:

"NTSC often was referred to as "Never the same color twice" in the old days of analog- and to some degree, barring some incredibly difficult math, the same leeway exists today in HD color correction".

rafael

http://www.nagavideo.com


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Craig SeemanRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 4:52:19 pm

NTSC color information is carried on a subcarrier (3.58MHz is memory serves) which could drift. I don't think that was ever the case with PAL (maybe PAL-M used subcarrier too 4.43MHz if memory serves although my memory of analog is fading).



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Rafael AmadorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 6:24:41 pm

[Craig Seeman] "NTSC color information is carried on a subcarrier (3.58MHz is memory serves) which could drift. I don't think that was ever the case with PAL (maybe PAL-M used subcarrier too 4.43MHz if memory serves although my memory of analog is fading)."

PAl avoid the hue deviations by shifting 180 degrees the chroma phase every line.
If there is a hue error that produces a wrong color in one line, will produce the complementary color in the next line. Our eyes will integrate both colors and we will see the correct one.

But this is not my question.
I understand well the Hue issue in analog NTSC and the situations that can produce it, but I don't understand when a Hue shift can come from on an all-digital-tapeless workflow.
I don't understand why he talks about hue shift when he is cutting files right from a camera.
Where the hue shift may come from?
rafael

http://www.nagavideo.com


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 6:39:44 pm

[Rafael Amador] "This guy doesn't know what is he talking about."

I agree that there's some weird things going on in that article. I can't see how 1080i and blue only is viable. The Matrox MXO did this and I always felt like it was a cheat.

He's doing to best he can with the tools he has chosen for himself.

There's no question that fcpx is a viable NLE for broadcast. Not for everyone, but if you can start and finish in fcpx, it's capable, and according to him, his clients have never been more pleased.

So, he might not know what the technical truth is, but he knows exactly what he's doing. There's a difference and it's an important one.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Rafael AmadorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 8:05:35 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "He's doing to best he can with the tools he has chosen for himself.

There's no question that fcpx is a viable NLE for broadcast. Not for everyone, but if you can start and finish in fcpx, it's capable, and according to him, his clients have never been more pleased.

So, he might not know what the technical truth is, but he knows exactly what he's doing. There's a difference and it's an important one."

Yes.
Like the labs rats that know which button to click to get food instead of an electro shock.
Mechanics doesn't need only to know WHICH screws they need to tight and HOW, but also WHY.

Jeremy, is nothing about FCPX but about understanding what is video.
He is able to undertake processes that he doesn't fully understand. He did that on his previous NLE and will do it with the next one. Good for him.
Nothing to criticise about, just that he should keep editing broadcast shows instead of writing blogs and talking on color.

I think FCPX is great for this kind of stuff where, more than editing, what you do is assembling the pieces of a program (the editing is done before even shooting).


[Jeremy Garchow] "I can't see how 1080i and blue only is viable."
That's really easy.
I've done that years ago with FCP when I wanted to calibrate my old SONY trinitron that has no "blue only'.
Put some bars on the time-line and drop the ""Channel Mixer" filter.
Set "Red Output" and "Green Output" = 0.
Done.
rafael

http://www.nagavideo.com


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 9:14:50 pm

[Rafael Amador] "Jeremy, is nothing about FCPX but about understanding what is video.
He is able to undertake processes that he doesn't fully understand. He did that on his previous NLE and will do it with the next one. Good for him.
Nothing to criticise about, just that he should keep editing broadcast shows instead of writing blogs and talking on color. "


It's like you don't want to believe that fcpx can actually be a viable NLE for someone who chooses to use it.

He chose it, he had the skills to deliver a broadcast series, and he wrote about it. So what?

You think he doesn't understand video or how to read scopes?

[Rafael Amador] "Set "Red Output" and "Green Output" = 0. "

You can't be serious, right?


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 7, 2012 at 9:28:21 pm

[Rafael Amador] "I think FCPX is great for this kind of stuff where, more than editing, what you do is assembling the pieces of a program (the editing is done before even shooting). "

Also, I have no idea how a fishing show can be edited before its shot, or any show edited before its shot and how fcpx or any NLE favors this over any other.

---

" Naysayers be damned." - Matthew Celia


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Matthew CeliaRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 8, 2012 at 12:43:14 am

Haha, did I just make it into your sig?

And BOY do I wish those shows I cut could be edited before they were shot :)

Seriously though, FCPX is particularly awesome for the OPPOSITE kind of work. You know, the kind where the director and DP had no concept of a script before shooting and need the editor to come in and tell a story. The skimmer and strip view has saved me hours of sifting through stuff on a recent documentary. It's wonderful for scanning and picking out small, beautiful moments...

----------------
FCP Guru
http://www.fcpguru.com


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 8, 2012 at 1:05:31 am

[Matthew Celia] "Haha, did I just make it into your sig?"

:)

I couldn't agree more. The access to footage is a very welcome feature.

I just hope the application will stabilize a bit more.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Rafael AmadorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 8, 2012 at 9:18:15 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "[Rafael Amador] "Set "Red Output" and "Green Output" = 0. "

You can't be serious, right?"

What is the all the "Only blue" about but feeding black in the R and G channels?

[Jeremy Garchow] "Also, I have no idea how a fishing show can be edited before its shot, or any show edited before its shot and how fcpx or any NLE favors this over any other."
You have't work much on Broadcast, don't you?

[Matthew Celia] " You know, the kind where the director and DP had no concept of a script before shooting and need the editor to come in and tell a story."
A director without a concept or script?
What a heck may have been directing?

rafael

http://www.nagavideo.com


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Thomas FrankRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 8, 2012 at 9:39:23 am

[Rafael Amador] "A director without a concept or script?"

Like David Fincher and Alien 3.



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Matthew CeliaRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 9, 2012 at 5:56:55 am

[Rafael Amador] "A director without a concept or script?
What a heck may have been directing?"


Concept OF A script. Surprising as this may be for you, what looks good on paper some times doesn't translate well when shot and sometimes (particularly on documentary stuff) the editor's job is to help find the story.

Editors are storytellers... remember? If all I had to do was assemble a bunch of shots, I'd train a monkey to do it and go to Europe on vacation.

----------------
FCP Guru
http://www.fcpguru.com


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Steve ConnorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 9, 2012 at 8:08:11 am

[Matthew Celia] "'d train a monkey to do it and go to Europe on vacation."

Now there's an idea!

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Rafael AmadorRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 9, 2012 at 2:28:48 pm

Story tellers?
Forgot many of you live near by Hollywood.
A walk through the real world would be better than a trip to Europe.
rafael

http://www.nagavideo.com


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Michael GissingRe: Interesting article on using FCPX for Broadcast
by on Jan 9, 2012 at 9:47:37 pm

Long format shows for me are 90-120 minute feature docos down to 52 minute broadcast docos. Half hour fishing shows are not exactly long form from my perspective but I am happy to accept many think that they qualify.

I haven't seen the show so don't know how complex the edit or post finishing might be but obviously being able to finish both picture and sound within FCPX is applicable for their workflow. There is a whole range within broadcast and I fully expect this sort of show to be a good candidate for an FCPX workflow. Well lit outdoors sport shows probably don't require complex grading or critical monitoring so again a reasonable fit. However most of the broadcast shows that I grade and mix benefit from using dedicated sound post tools and grading on da Vinci or Color. The speed and accuracy that my clients demand could not be done within any single editing software app.

All this article really says is that FCPX is as good or better than using FCP7 as an editing and finishing tool for this particular show. I don't think we should infer that it means anything beyond that for the majority of broadcast work.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Craig SeemanThe Next Bite - the show
by on Jan 9, 2012 at 10:15:08 pm

Since people seem to want to see what the show looks like, I found these.

http://www.thenextbite.com/

http://www.youtube.com/user/thenextbite

http://www.myoutdoortv.com/shows/the-next-bite



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Michael GissingRe: The Next Bite - the show
by on Jan 9, 2012 at 10:36:09 pm

OK. Had a look at the show. It looks and sounds like an offline edit to me with a small amount of audio work and some minor grading. Frankly it wouldn't pass tech check with broadcasters and distributors that I work with. The photography and lightning actually needs a lot of help with luma curve manipulation and secondary grades to lift faces.

I am sure that this standard is OK with some broadcasters but it doesn't seem to me to be a good example of finishing within FCPX. Under whelmed somewhat.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

VIEW ALL   •   PRINT
Share on Facebook


FORUMSTUTORIALSFEATURESVIDEOSPODCASTSEVENTSSERVICESNEWSLETTERNEWSBLOGS

Creative COW LinkedIn Group Creative COW Facebook Page Creative COW on Twitter
© 2014 CreativeCOW.net All rights are reserved. - Privacy Policy

[Top]